The law and Kejriwal’s crusade
23 Oct 2012 10:23 PM GMT
It has been clear from the time of Anna Hazare’s fasts that the civil society activists are adhering to Mao Zedong’s ‘bombard the headquarters’ tactics against the Manmohan Singh government. As is known, the Chinese chairman’s battle was against his own party which, he felt, had lost its revolutionary zeal. But, the point of that onslaught was that it was launched by the Red Guards from outside.
Similarly, the essence of Anna’s and now Arvind Kejriwal’s campaigns is that these are attacks from outside on a supposedly corrupt system. Although Kejriwal can now be said to have become a part of the system by his decision to launch a political party, the party hasn’t yet been formed or named, and the tactics of his India Against Corruption [IAC] group remain those of an outsider.
Hence, these are based on the methods, which have been common in India since the colonial days – processions, sit-ins, courting of arrest, and so on. The added advantage from the pre-independence days is the wide visual publicity, which India’s multiple news-hungry television channels are providing to the demonstrators, including the intervention of anchors, who do not always follow the old-fashioned norms of objectivity.
Since the fallout is a cacophony that can become tiresome after a while, Kejriwal and Co have found a new way to retain the attention of the viewers. It is to move from one target to another with the promise of producing more ‘evidence’ in instalments. Thus, if it is Robert Vadra one day, it is Salman Khurshid the next.
Earlier, when Anna and Kejriwal were together, 15 Union ministers were arraigned, including Pranab Mukherjee. Even after the latter became the President, Kejriwal said that such a person should not be in the Rashtrapati Bhavan. Now, the alleged sins of the ministers have been relegated to the background and it is not impossible that in course of time, Vadra and Salman Khurshid, too, will yield their places in the shooting gallery to someone else, perhaps Nitin Gadkari.
But, it is clear that the show will go on. Nor is it something that needs to be condemned since there is little doubt that a semi-political sleuth is required to ensure that the suspects cannot get away easily. If there is a wide measure of public sympathy for such activism, the reason is that the normal methods of nabbing the guilty – police investigations, court cases – are either nullified by official intervention or are too prolonged to carry conviction. In fact, this was precisely why Anna initiated his campaign with the demand for a Lokpal so that the existing systemic deficiencies could be circumvented.
However, as the fading out of his movement showed, it is difficult to sustain it if the system is constantly derided or mocked, as was evident from slogans like ‘Anna is India’ or ‘Anna is above parliament.’ Hence, the Bombay High Court’s observation during Anna’s flop show in the city last December that one man’s satyagraha can be another’s nuisance.
It is not impossible that the IAC’s agitation will meet the same fate if, first, it loses the political support which it is receiving from the non-Congress parties if it targets them as well and, secondly, if more loopholes begin to appear in the charge-sheets as when several of them presented sub judice cases as gospel truth.
The longevity of Kejriwal’s crusade may also be affected by the fact that, as in the case of Anna, the latest offensive is mainly an urban-oriented, middle class phenomenon driven by an anti-Congress outlook. The BJP is with him at present, but how long it will do so if Gadkari comes in Kejriwal’s line of fire is doubtful. The Left, on its part, has maintained a discreet distance unlike the time when it jumped on Anna’s bandwagon with Brinda Karat and Arun Jaitley flanking the fakir from Ralegan Siddhi at Jantar Mantar.
Irrespective of how long and how effective is the IAC’s offensive, its sincerity and stamina can be tested if the accused take it to court. Otherwise, the unconvincing spectacle of the suspects presenting their ‘evidence’ of truthfulness at press conferences only for Kejriwal and Co to reject them as ‘fictitious’ will be irritatingly familiar.
Arguably, if no one has filed for defamation so far, the reason is that there is a grain of truth in the charges. Besides, a judicial investigation can unearth other damaging evidence as well. After all, politics in India is a cesspool, as Amitabh Bachchan said after his brief stint in the profession. Similarly, the accusers themselves may not be as lily-white as they claim. It probably suits them both, therefore, to indulge in shadowboxing instead of putting the matter to a real test.
Even then, only the courts remain a credible option even if the customary law’s delay suits the accused and prevents the accusers from making any political capital out of their charges. [IPA]
Similarly, the essence of Anna’s and now Arvind Kejriwal’s campaigns is that these are attacks from outside on a supposedly corrupt system. Although Kejriwal can now be said to have become a part of the system by his decision to launch a political party, the party hasn’t yet been formed or named, and the tactics of his India Against Corruption [IAC] group remain those of an outsider.
Hence, these are based on the methods, which have been common in India since the colonial days – processions, sit-ins, courting of arrest, and so on. The added advantage from the pre-independence days is the wide visual publicity, which India’s multiple news-hungry television channels are providing to the demonstrators, including the intervention of anchors, who do not always follow the old-fashioned norms of objectivity.
Since the fallout is a cacophony that can become tiresome after a while, Kejriwal and Co have found a new way to retain the attention of the viewers. It is to move from one target to another with the promise of producing more ‘evidence’ in instalments. Thus, if it is Robert Vadra one day, it is Salman Khurshid the next.
Earlier, when Anna and Kejriwal were together, 15 Union ministers were arraigned, including Pranab Mukherjee. Even after the latter became the President, Kejriwal said that such a person should not be in the Rashtrapati Bhavan. Now, the alleged sins of the ministers have been relegated to the background and it is not impossible that in course of time, Vadra and Salman Khurshid, too, will yield their places in the shooting gallery to someone else, perhaps Nitin Gadkari.
But, it is clear that the show will go on. Nor is it something that needs to be condemned since there is little doubt that a semi-political sleuth is required to ensure that the suspects cannot get away easily. If there is a wide measure of public sympathy for such activism, the reason is that the normal methods of nabbing the guilty – police investigations, court cases – are either nullified by official intervention or are too prolonged to carry conviction. In fact, this was precisely why Anna initiated his campaign with the demand for a Lokpal so that the existing systemic deficiencies could be circumvented.
However, as the fading out of his movement showed, it is difficult to sustain it if the system is constantly derided or mocked, as was evident from slogans like ‘Anna is India’ or ‘Anna is above parliament.’ Hence, the Bombay High Court’s observation during Anna’s flop show in the city last December that one man’s satyagraha can be another’s nuisance.
It is not impossible that the IAC’s agitation will meet the same fate if, first, it loses the political support which it is receiving from the non-Congress parties if it targets them as well and, secondly, if more loopholes begin to appear in the charge-sheets as when several of them presented sub judice cases as gospel truth.
The longevity of Kejriwal’s crusade may also be affected by the fact that, as in the case of Anna, the latest offensive is mainly an urban-oriented, middle class phenomenon driven by an anti-Congress outlook. The BJP is with him at present, but how long it will do so if Gadkari comes in Kejriwal’s line of fire is doubtful. The Left, on its part, has maintained a discreet distance unlike the time when it jumped on Anna’s bandwagon with Brinda Karat and Arun Jaitley flanking the fakir from Ralegan Siddhi at Jantar Mantar.
Irrespective of how long and how effective is the IAC’s offensive, its sincerity and stamina can be tested if the accused take it to court. Otherwise, the unconvincing spectacle of the suspects presenting their ‘evidence’ of truthfulness at press conferences only for Kejriwal and Co to reject them as ‘fictitious’ will be irritatingly familiar.
Arguably, if no one has filed for defamation so far, the reason is that there is a grain of truth in the charges. Besides, a judicial investigation can unearth other damaging evidence as well. After all, politics in India is a cesspool, as Amitabh Bachchan said after his brief stint in the profession. Similarly, the accusers themselves may not be as lily-white as they claim. It probably suits them both, therefore, to indulge in shadowboxing instead of putting the matter to a real test.
Even then, only the courts remain a credible option even if the customary law’s delay suits the accused and prevents the accusers from making any political capital out of their charges. [IPA]
Next Story
